Should Men be able to hit Women?

[EndlessCravings]

I personally feel they should. I feel like if you hit you can get hit back despite who has more muscle mass than who. I know there are going to be some responses saying "No one should be hitting anyone" and "Violence isn't the answer" and all of that. But my question is:Should Men be able to hit Women?

[Medusa]

Be able? They already do.

If you mean legally, anyone can hit anyone, they just get in trouble for it...if caught.

[EndlessCravings]

Be able? They already do.

If you mean legally, anyone can hit anyone, they just get in trouble for it...if caught.
I meant like if a female hit a male should he be able to hit her back.

[monsno_leedra]

That's a loaded question for sure.

Is hitting open fisted or closed fisted? Is hitting putting your full force behind a blow or is it simply an open back hand applied to some part of the body? Sort of the question is smacking hitting? It also leads to the support questions of should they then be allowed to shove, push, restrain, etc as those seem to be as implied in what one can or can not do as hitting when it comes to male and female encounters.

That said most guys I know would say if she swings at you then its fair game to swing back. Yet the method of swinging back then becomes the issue.

[EndlessCravings]

That's a loaded question for sure.

Is hitting open fisted or closed fisted? Is hitting putting your full force behind a blow or is it simply an open back hand applied to some part of the body? Sort of the question is smacking hitting? It also leads to the support questions of should they then be allowed to shove, push, restrain, etc as those seem to be as implied in what one can or can not do as hitting when it comes to male and female encounters.

That said most guys I know would say if she swings at you then its fair game to swing back. Yet the method of swinging back then becomes the issue.
I personally thought whether or not it's open or closed hand mattered. Smacking is hitting as far as I'm concerned unless it's so small it's a tap. Hitting is not putting your full force. I mean, I really don't know. Some people hit with full force some don't. I was just interested in your opinion on it.

[monsno_leedra]

I personally thought whether or not it's open or closed hand mattered. Smacking is hitting as far as I'm concerned unless it's so small it's a tap. Hitting is not putting your full force. I mean, I really don't know. Some people hit with full force some don't. I was just interested in your opinion on it.

I know for police perspective closed fisted or open palmed is a big difference. Sort of the difference between assault as a felony or assault as a misdemeanor. Both get you in trouble but the return is quite different.

I understood your just looking for opinions on it but as a subject its to broad I think to expect a generic response. Not only to broad but I think it also heavily depends upon circumstances associated with any occurrence. One might be justified yet change the conditions even a bit and it no longer is seen in the same light, regardless of who is doing the observing.

[Denarius]

I think the real problem is that the violence that women commit isn't take as seriously as men's violence, even though it's just as physically and emotionally damaging. (http://time.com/2921491/hope-solo-women-violence/)

Men have overwhelmingly less access to resources set aside for abuse victims, (https://nationalparentsorganization.org/blog/3977-researcher-what-hap-3977)and are actively discriminated against in the legal system. (http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff-nation/assignments/facing-our-greatest-shame/13094512/Domestic-violence-debate-dominated-by-womens-perspectives)

[anubisa]

I think it depends on the situation and who is hitting who. For example, if a father is reprimanding a daughter by spanking her, then yes I think it is fine as long as he doesn't over do it. If it is between a woman and man it also depends. If a woman is attacking a man then he has a right to defend himself. However, if he is abusing her then no I don't think it is right for him to hit her. I just think it depends on the situation.

[Medusa]

I guess men now know how it feels to be a woman.

[EndlessCravings]

I think the real problem is that the violence that women commit isn't take as seriously as men's violence, even though it's just as physically and emotionally damaging. (http://time.com/2921491/hope-solo-women-violence/)

Men have overwhelmingly less access to resources set aside for abuse victims, (https://nationalparentsorganization.org/blog/3977-researcher-what-hap-3977)and are actively discriminated against in the legal system. (http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff-nation/assignments/facing-our-greatest-shame/13094512/Domestic-violence-debate-dominated-by-womens-perspectives)

You're right. Violence that women commit against men isn't taken seriously enough. I saw a video on Youtube of some woman shoving her bf(social experiment) and she was yelling at him and all of that fun stuff and some people were taking out their phones and saying "Worldstar! Worldstar!"'
But when the roles were reversed and it was him yelling at her and grabbing her arm roughly someone quickly stepped in.

- - - Updated - - -


I think it depends on the situation and who is hitting who. For example, if a father is reprimanding a daughter by spanking her, then yes I think it is fine as long as he doesn't over do it. If it is between a woman and man it also depends. If a woman is attacking a man then he has a right to defend himself. However, if he is abusing her then no I don't think it is right for him to hit her. I just think it depends on the situation.

Yeah, I meant more of in a defense situation but I get what you're saying.

[monsno_leedra]

You're right. Violence that women commit against men isn't taken seriously enough. I saw a video on Youtube of some woman shoving her bf(social experiment) and she was yelling at him and all of that fun stuff and some people were taking out their phones and saying "Worldstar! Worldstar!"'
But when the roles were reversed and it was him yelling at her and grabbing her arm roughly someone quickly stepped in.

I've seen a few of those staged video's on Youtube. What's sad, or ironic I suppose, is the vast difference between how society in general views the aggression between males or females. In some capacity it's the same imbalanced view that you used to see with insurance and driving. Yet it is also something that is very much driven by society in that i've seen situations in the US or Europe where the males are guilty and the females condoned. Yet the very same scenario in say the Philliphines and guilt was about equal as to who was at fault. Yet when it involved "scum" as seen by the society such as the Roma in the Med Region then the woman was almost always at fought and deserving of what she got from the man whom she had tricked or abused.

[Sean R. R.]

I guess men now know how it feels to be a woman.

What do you mean?

[ThePaganMafia]

I think people, in general, shouldn't hit each other.

There are valid men's issues like underreported abuse, legal issues vs. women, and your regular general stereotypes. While these are all valid and deserve their fair coverage I feel like the issues are tainted by MRA's and bros who use them to try to invalidate important women's issues. Also, when I hear men talking about how they should be able to hit a woman when if he hits him it always comes off to me as a dude just looking for an excuse to hit a woman.

On the issue of defense, I mean, yeah if it comes down to it defend yourself. But, if a woman hits you it doesn't give you the right to beat the shit out of a woman which is what sounds like what a lot of men who debate for their right to hit women back want to do.

[Medusa]

What do you mean?

The gist being that because of your gender, you are treated differently and there is a double standard and little resource for you. As in when men get abused, they find they are looked down upon, their masculinity is called into question etc. When women get abused they get looked down upon, their decision making is called into question and their worth as well. It's not right. But as a woman I feel it and understand the subtext that this world is definitely not made with a female in mind.


I don't think anyone should hit anyone. But it's not what I think that's important. It's what does a man who is six feet tall and over 200 think when he hits a woman. Like really? If you want to hurt a woman just tell her that her vagina stinks like cat food. I mean use your brain. You won't go to jail for that.

[Sean R. R.]

Since dawn of time men have faced injustices as much as women. It's not about the patriarchy. People with lots of power are genderless, and they treat their "subjects" as shit no matter their gender. We get different issues because of gender, but we men get as much social issues as women.

[Medusa]

Since dawn of time men have faced injustices as much as women. It's not about the patriarchy. People with lots of power are genderless, and they treat their "subjects" as shit no matter their gender. We get different issues because of gender, but we men get as much social issues as women.

Yes you do. Yours just seems to be more important than our at times. I mean you can get birth control with no problems. No one is patrolling your testicles. Unlike the govt pretty much setting up senate offices in my uterus and breasts. I'm not disagreeing with you. People with lots of power are genderless suuuure. But it's not a kowinkidink most of those are of the male gender. I love men. I'm not a man hater. I know men get it bad. But I'm not completely clueless as how the real world works outside of those things we have to pretend aren't the way they are.

[Sean R. R.]

Yes you do. Yours just seems to be more important than our at times. I mean you can get birth control with no problems. No one is patrolling your testicles. Unlike the govt pretty much setting up senate offices in my uterus and breasts. I'm not disagreeing with you. People with lots of power are genderless suuuure. But it's not a kowinkidink most of those are of the male gender. I love men. I'm not a man hater. I know men get it bad. But I'm not completely clueless as how the real world works outside of those things we have to pretend aren't the way they are.

I can agree that both our problem's come from a largely male interpretation of BOTH male and female rights, but it is not the male gender to blame. If women were at power, it would be exactly the same, women would still have as much problems than men. What I'm trying to say is that the gender of the persons of power is only relevant to the nature of the injustices, but not relevant to their existence.

[Tylluan Penry]

Let's put this another way for all you men out there. If a man hits your mother, is that okay? Or how about your daughter's boyfriend hitting her?

Being a woman is not easy. Not even nowadays. The old 'Well, what about a woman hitting a man,' scenario conveniently ignores that most violence against women is committed by men. Not by all men, of course. Just men they trusted.

And when woman are abused, there is the question of blame. In my part of the world a woman and her two children were murdered by her husband, and the police described it as a domestic incident. No, it wasn't. It was a triple murder. Rape victims are routinely blamed for their clothes, for being drunk, for 'leading a man on.'

It is time that some men took a long hard look at themselves. Because violence doesn't usually 'just happen..'' There is a long build up of controlling behaviour. That's where the trouble starts.

[Denarius]

most violence against women is committed by men. Not by all men, of course. Just men they trusted.

Well, in my part of the world: Women are just as physically abusive as men. (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226871004_The_two_facets_of_female_violence_The_pu blic_and_the_domestic_domains)
They are just as likely to be the initiators of violence. (http://web.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm)
Their motivations for violence are the same as men. (http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V71-Straus_Thirty-Years-Denying-Evidence-PV_10.pdf)

[Medusa]

Well, in my part of the world: Women are just as physically abusive as men. (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226871004_The_two_facets_of_female_violence_The_pu blic_and_the_domestic_domains)
They are just as likely to be the initiators of violence. (http://web.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm)
Their motivations for violence are the same as men. (http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V71-Straus_Thirty-Years-Denying-Evidence-PV_10.pdf)

I can agree with that. Pacific northwest gals are like beefy chics with plaid flannel shirts, right?:p

[Denarius]

Pacific northwest gals are like beefy chics with plaid flannel shirts, right?:p

In the country sure, in the cities they're waifish twenty-somethings with facial piercings and outlandish hair colors.

[iris]

Haven't read through all of the answers so I might be repeating someone. No, men shouldn't be allowed to hit women legally - if we want to level out the playing field, the consequenses of women hitting men should be harder. It's not actually legal to hit anyone, let's keep it that way...

That whole 'if you can give, you can take' mentality is screwed up. It's easily abused too. I have been with someone who felt that way, but didn't really differentiate between agression and poking or accidentally walking in to him... but I somehow always 'asked for it'. So no. Too easily abused by people who want to. It should never be ok.

[EndlessCravings]

Haven't read through all of the answers so I might be repeating someone. No, men shouldn't be allowed to hit women legally - if we want to level out the playing field, the consequenses of women hitting men should be harder. It's not actually legal to hit anyone, let's keep it that way...

That whole 'if you can give, you can take' mentality is screwed up. It's easily abused too. I have been with someone who felt that way, but didn't really differentiate between agression and poking or accidentally walking in to him... but I somehow always 'asked for it'. So no. Too easily abused by people who want to. It should never be ok.
Okay, so if a woman hits a man it's not okay for him to pop her back? Not beat the hell out of her, but hit her back.

[Juniper]

I can't be arsed to read the whole thread so I'm just going to respond to the OP.

I'm in the boat of "no one should be hitting anyone, " and I find women hitting men just as repulsive and demeaning as men hitting women. The only exception I can accept is if one is defending his or her life from the other. Men deserve just as much protection from abuse as women do. It's not "equal rights" if it's not actually equal.

[iris]

Okay, so if a woman hits a man it's not okay for him to pop her back? Not beat the hell out of her, but hit her back.

I'm all for self defence. But if you read what I wrote, no,noone should legally be allowed to hit anyone. I don't actually care about the gender. It's just as legal for a man to defend himself as it is for a woman (here anyway. I'm not american), and I'll just repeat what I said earlier, we shouldn't legalize violence from ANY part to even it out, rather make sure women are punished same as men for it.

[DanieMarie]

I think people, in general, shouldn't hit each other.

There are valid men's issues like underreported abuse, legal issues vs. women, and your regular general stereotypes. While these are all valid and deserve their fair coverage I feel like the issues are tainted by MRA's and bros who use them to try to invalidate important women's issues. Also, when I hear men talking about how they should be able to hit a woman when if he hits him it always comes off to me as a dude just looking for an excuse to hit a woman.

On the issue of defense, I mean, yeah if it comes down to it defend yourself. But, if a woman hits you it doesn't give you the right to beat the shit out of a woman which is what sounds like what a lot of men who debate for their right to hit women back want to do.

This. Couldn't have said it better.

[anunitu]

Agree PM,and it should be noted that it does happen where Men are abused..Most men would not admit it,spousal abuse can happen to men as well.

[EndlessCravings]

I'm all for self defence. But if you read what I wrote, no,noone should legally be allowed to hit anyone. I don't actually care about the gender. It's just as legal for a man to defend himself as it is for a woman (here anyway. I'm not american), and I'll just repeat what I said earlier, we shouldn't legalize violence from ANY part to even it out, rather make sure women are punished same as men for it.

I read it just only responded to a part of it, it seems.

- - - Updated - - -


Agree PM,and it should be noted that it does happen where Men are abused..Most men would not admit it,spousal abuse can happen to men as well.
You're right. But men are shamed for it and it isn't taken seriously enough.

[Briton]

If you, a man, are stronger or as strong as the woman, why would you hit? This isn't a boxing match, nor a movie. Just restrain them.

If you're weaker than the woman, well, if you're weaker than a man, would you pick a fight with them? If they initiated it, then you have two options: get out or hit back. Let's face it, get out is the sensible or wise choice. But how many actually would do that? Whilst hitting back isn't the better choice, I wouldn't judge.

Personally, I can't imagine doing anything other than restraining. I actually had an abusive ex, who either hit me or threw stuff at me. I held her back every time, I never hit her. One day, however, I got sick of it all and raised my hand to her. That wasn't me and I knew it was time to get out.

Hitting back is really a last resort. Somehow recommending hitting just seems very... bestial and vengeful. Don't get me wrong, I like seeing people get their comeuppance, but if your loved one is hitting you (women don't have a tendency of getting drunk in bars and starting fights, that's more of a guy thing) one has to think why. Either you wronged them, or they're being unreasonable, or they don't know how to control their anger. If you spend a moment to think about the ethics of "hitting back", you've already reasoned. If you can reason, you should know that they're probably going to regret it later. It's not about being better than them, it's about not punishing someone for their mistake or, in the case of people who have been abused, for someone else's wrongdoing.

Unless you have no other option (which still, obviously, isn't a good thing) don't hit, restrain or get away. You don't improve a situation by lowering yourself into it.

[kalynraye]

So again I will be agreeing with PM on this one. He said it perfectly. I would also agree again with I'm not really for the violence act but I have 5 brothers, all 5 of them are excellent men. I can also say that if they were hit by a women in violence they wouldn't have to hit her back because I would do it! All of my brothers are over 6 feet tall and are solid muscles. They work in concert, plumbing, pipe lines and 1 is a police officer, so they are all solid muscle. They couldn't hit a women without causing serious pain, not that they would try to. And because of this they wouldn't hit her back. This is where I'm the big sister comes in play.

The idea that if you're big enough to step up to someone and hit them then you're big enough to be hit back doesn't work for me. Again 5 brothers over 6 feet and I'm 5'3. I have been plenty angry to hit them when we were younger and I did and never once did they hit me back no matter how mad they were at me because they're fist/hand packs way way more power than mine ever did. Most men are stronger the women, let's be honest here, and can restrain a woman instead of hitting her.

[EndlessCravings]

If you, a man, are stronger or as strong as the woman, why would you hit? This isn't a boxing match, nor a movie. Just restrain them.

If you're weaker than the woman, well, if you're weaker than a man, would you pick a fight with them? If they initiated it, then you have two options: get out or hit back. Let's face it, get out is the sensible or wise choice. But how many actually would do that? Whilst hitting back isn't the better choice, I wouldn't judge.

Personally, I can't imagine doing anything other than restraining. I actually had an abusive ex, who either hit me or threw stuff at me. I held her back every time, I never hit her. One day, however, I got sick of it all and raised my hand to her. That wasn't me and I knew it was time to get out.

Hitting back is really a last resort. Somehow recommending hitting just seems very... bestial and vengeful. Don't get me wrong, I like seeing people get their comeuppance, but if your loved one is hitting you (women don't have a tendency of getting drunk in bars and starting fights, that's more of a guy thing) one has to think why. Either you wronged them, or they're being unreasonable, or they don't know how to control their anger. If you spend a moment to think about the ethics of "hitting back", you've already reasoned. If you can reason, you should know that they're probably going to regret it later. It's not about being better than them, it's about not punishing someone for their mistake or, in the case of people who have been abused, for someone else's wrongdoing.

Unless you have no other option (which still, obviously, isn't a good thing) don't hit, restrain or get away. You don't improve a situation by lowering yourself into it.
I raised to hit back either way. Gender doesn't matter or whatever you chose to identify didn't matter when it came to my Kin. Then again my family is pretty violent as it is. It was usually "If someone hits you and you don't hit them back I'm beating your ass" or "I'm whooping you" I first heard it the time my six year old cousin threw a high heeled shoe at me and it hit me in my face right above my eye.
edit:what does strength have to do with it? I don't understand why you dish something out if you can't take it back. I'm not saying the guy has to hit her full force and knock her out, but still.

- - - Updated - - -


So again I will be agreeing with PM on this one. He said it perfectly. I would also agree again with I'm not really for the violence act but I have 5 brothers, all 5 of them are excellent men. I can also say that if they were hit by a women in violence they wouldn't have to hit her back because I would do it! All of my brothers are over 6 feet tall and are solid muscles. They work in concert, plumbing, pipe lines and 1 is a police officer, so they are all solid muscle. They couldn't hit a women without causing serious pain, not that they would try to. And because of this they wouldn't hit her back. This is where I'm the big sister comes in play.

The idea that if you're big enough to step up to someone and hit them then you're big enough to be hit back doesn't work for me. Again 5 brothers over 6 feet and I'm 5'3. I have been plenty angry to hit them when we were younger and I did and never once did they hit me back no matter how mad they were at me because they're fist/hand packs way way more power than mine ever did. Most men are stronger the women, let's be honest here, and can restrain a woman instead of hitting her.
That doesn't really register with me but ok.

[Bartmanhomer]

This is a tricky question indeed. I don't think men shouldn't be able to hit woman unless if the woman is threatening the man life. He should hit woman with self-defense.

[thalassa]

I was raised to believe that the only time you should resort to violence is when a) it is to defend your life or the life of someone incapable of defending themselves or b) when you deem that the issue is worthing getting your arse kicked for*.

Hitting someone isn't appropriate. It is even less appropriate when you are the person in power in the relationship dynamics and/or when you are physically stronger/more capable, whether you are male or female. Generally speaking, in my experience as a veteran, this is usually the male and the victim is either the partner or the kids or both.



*Since some people have difficulty with this, I will explain it: Any moron that gets in a fight does so with the expectation of winning--for the most part, intentionally making the choice for violence to prove a point, to save face, or to show dominance is the craven and ultimately cowardly and shows a complete lack of discipline. If something is truly worth fighting for, it's worth losing for (this doesn't mean you shouldn't actually try to win when you are fighting). If you can't say, "this is important enough to me that it is worth getting the floor smeared with my face," then it's not worth hitting or hitting back for. Also, being willing to die for something doesn't count either--martyrdom is its own success. Most of the time, it actually takes more courage and more self-control to turn around and walk away than to hit back.

[Tylluan Penry]

I raised to hit back either way. Gender doesn't matter or whatever you chose to identify didn't matter when it came to my Kin. Then again my family is pretty violent as it is. It was usually "If someone hits you and you don't hit them back I'm beating your ass" or "I'm whooping you" I first heard it the time my six year old cousin threw a high heeled shoe at me and it hit me in my face right above my eye.
edit:what does strength have to do with it? I don't understand why you dish something out if you can't take it back. I'm not saying the guy has to hit her full force and knock her out, but still.



My father - who was fairly enlightened for his time - told me not to hit any man. Even if he hit me first.
'Poison him instead,' he told me. 'Much easier.'

For some reason though, people are afraid of my cooking... ;)

[Bartmanhomer]

Like I said before if a woman threatened a man's life I believe the man should fight back and defend himself. Other than that, it's a big no-no. I understand that there are men who's usually phsically powerful than women because of their body built but there are some women who are just as powerful and dangerous as men. Just take Rhonda Rousey for example, Her muscles are huge and she can knock out so many people including men for less than a second.

[EndlessCravings]

This is a tricky question indeed. I don't think men shouldn't be able to hit woman unless if the woman is threatening the man life. He should hit woman with self-defense.
That's basically what I'm asking. If she hits you, should you be able to hit her back.

- - - Updated - - -


My father - who was fairly enlightened for his time - told me not to hit any man. Even if he hit me first.
'Poison him instead,' he told me. 'Much easier.'

For some reason though, people are afraid of my cooking... ;)
What type of dishes do you cook?

[thalassa]

That's basically what I'm asking. If she hits you, should you be able to hit her back.


Hitting someone is not the same as threatening their life.

[EndlessCravings]

Hitting someone is not the same as threatening their life.
'Preciate the correction, Thalassa.

[monsno_leedra]

Personally I think the question here also has to be addressed from a social aspect of culture. In western culture's women are still very much placed on a pedestal in regards to how we think they should act and should be interacted with. It could probably be viewed in the context of gender norms and such. So the idea of hitting is taught on many levels to be wrong from the aspect women are the weaker sex and are to be treated differently. It also, to me anyway, falls into that false sense of equality that many seem to imply they want but so strongly stand in opposition to.

Like I implied earlier there is a vast difference between how the West see's violence and equality compared to many other areas.

[EndlessCravings]

Personally I think the question here also has to be addressed from a social aspect of culture. In western culture's women are still very much placed on a pedestal in regards to how we think they should act and should be interacted with. It could probably be viewed in the context of gender norms and such. So the idea of hitting is taught on many levels to be wrong from the aspect women are the weaker sex and are to be treated differently. It also, to me anyway, falls into that false sense of equality that many seem to imply they want but so strongly stand in opposition to.

Like I implied earlier there is a vast difference between how the West see's violence and equality compared to many other areas.
Yep. I think I had a discussion with a teacher about a woman demanding equality, hitting a dude, but when he hit her back she went "You can't hit me, I'm a woman!" Seen it somewhere.

[kalynraye]

Yep. I think I had a discussion with a teacher about a woman demanding equality, hitting a dude, but when he hit her back she went "You can't hit me, I'm a woman!" Seen it somewhere.

It's not that he can't hit her but he should not hit her. But she shouldn't be hitting him eaither. No one should be hitting anyone. Like Brinton said even if she hits you first there are other alternatives to hitting her back, restrain her or walk away. I have said it once and I will say it again most men are stronger then women, and I'll guarantee that most men even open palmed hit harder then women. So unless your fighting for your life don't hit her back.

[EndlessCravings]

It's not that he can't hit her but he should not hit her. But she shouldn't be hitting him eaither. No one should be hitting anyone. Like Brinton said even if she hits you first there are other alternatives to hitting her back, restrain her or walk away. I have said it once and I will say it again most men are stronger then women, and I'll guarantee that most men even open palmed hit harder then women. So unless your fighting for your life don't hit her back.
*Briton
Okay.

[monsno_leedra]

It's not that he can't hit her but he should not hit her. But she shouldn't be hitting him eaither. No one should be hitting anyone. Like Brinton said even if she hits you first there are other alternatives to hitting her back, restrain her or walk away. I have said it once and I will say it again most men are stronger then women, and I'll guarantee that most men even open palmed hit harder then women. So unless your fighting for your life don't hit her back.

Bolded mine. That's that cultural and social conditioning kicking in. In many ways it's suggestive, well to me anyway, of it's condoned for the woman to do it as she is not expected to suffer the returns of her actions. Figure for most males is conditioned in us that if we project outward then we can expect a return force against us. Yet the idea that woman should be allowed to do so without an equal return is in part based on that they are petite and almost childish in their actions so there for not specifically responsible nor suffer the same returns.

[kalynraye]

*Briton
Okay.

Yep thanks for the correction.

- - - Updated - - -


Bolded mine. That's that cultural and social conditioning kicking in. In many ways it's suggestive, well to me anyway, of it's condoned for the woman to do it as she is not expected to suffer the returns of her actions. Figure for most males is conditioned in us that if we project outward then we can expect a return force against us. Yet the idea that woman should be allowed to do so without an equal return is in part based on that they are petite and almost childish in their actions so there for not specifically responsible nor suffer the same returns.

You missed the next sentence after that, which stated she shouldn't be hitting him either. No where have I stated that she should be allowed to hit and not suffer consequences. I did say however there were other ways to handle it then striking her back.

[monsno_leedra]

.. You missed the next sentence after that, which stated she shouldn't be hitting him either. No where have I stated that she should be allowed to hit and not suffer consequences. I did say however there were other ways to handle it then striking her back.

No I didn't but the position your presenting is the woman should be excused. Yes many will say they shouldn't hit but then they also don't start out justifying why they shouldn't be touched as the lead in. It's one or the other, they don't hit and no one should or if they do hit then they should be expecting an equal return. Stating they shouldn't be because they are weaker and men stronger is the very thing I stated, that social and cultural conditioning. Not much different in the aspect of a son is a son till he takes a wife but a daughter is a daughter all of her life. It's how our culture and society is conditioned to forgive and not raise them to expect an equal return for their actions.

[DragonsFriend]

My dad told us we should never hit a girl. There was nine of us boys and three girls as kids. Yes twelve kids, one mother and no twins. I later changed that to "you never hit a lady" simply because a lady won't give you a reason to hit her. (I am not the abusive male chauvinist) Be that as it may, I did strike my ex-wife once. I was married to an addict and addicts tend to get very physical at times. I would usually just walk away but this time I was driving down the road when she began pummeling me with both fists as I was driving. I backhanded her, which stopped the attack, pulled the car over and walked the 4 miles home leaving her to drive the car home. I don't feel I was wrong or excessive but I did not want to remain in the car with her. The last three years we were together were hellish and I happily divorced her.

[EndlessCravings]

My dad told us we should never hit a girl. There was nine of us boys and three girls as kids. Yes twelve kids, one mother and no twins. I later changed that to "you never hit a lady" simply because a lady won't give you a reason to hit her. (I am not the abusive male chauvinist) Be that as it may, I did strike my ex-wife once. I was married to an addict and addicts tend to get very physical at times. I would usually just walk away but this time I was driving down the road when she began pummeling me with both fists as I was driving. I backhanded her, which stopped the attack, pulled the car over and walked the 4 miles home leaving her to drive the car home. I don't feel I was wrong or excessive but I did not want to remain in the car with her. The last three years we were together were hellish and I happily divorced her.
I'm glad you didn't feel bad about back handing her. Her pummeling you while driving is very dangerous and reckless. I hope you're doing better now.

[DragonsFriend]

I am better now. After waiting about 13 years I remarried a wonderful woman who is neither violent nor an addict. We have yet to even have an argument after twelve wonderful years. She is probably not what most would call an assertive woman but her submission fits our lifestyle well and I take very good care of her.

[Medusa]

Technically anyone can do whatever they want. They just have to pay the legal consequences. I think right now it's assault irregardless of the gender.

[anunitu]

Wondering how we get into these topics so much...."Have you stopped beating your wife?"

- - - Updated - - -

Really interesting

Here. (http://www.mrmediatraining.com/2011/09/19/when-did-you-stop-beating-your-wife/)

[monsno_leedra]

Wondering how we get into these topics so much...."Have you stopped beating your wife?"

- - - Updated - - -

Really interesting

Here. (http://www.mrmediatraining.com/2011/09/19/when-did-you-stop-beating-your-wife/)

Personally I think it's more than the notion of violence but more of an analysis of cultural and social norms. Figure how often do we discuss the inequality between genders, races, economic groups, etc? Far to often it seems, to me anyway, that discussions touch upon the larger concept but ignore or downplay the mitigating factors. Figure attitude towards violence between men and woman versus male on male or female on female often ignores the very laws, morals and social constructs that are in place to promote or support them.

[MaskedOne]

Technically anyone can do whatever they want. They just have to pay the legal consequences. I think right now it's assault irregardless of the gender.

Legally, yes it's assault either way.

Practically, someone has to actually prosecute the case. If (and I don't know if this occurs frequently because I don't regularly look up abuse statistics) local police and DAs don't believe in female abusers then getting one prosecuted might be just short of impossible. A more dramatic example would be a shooting in Florida a few years ago there was a mass uproar when the local DA wasn't initially preparing to charge the shooter. There are multiple steps to convict a person of assault and a number of places to derail things even before trial.

[Tylluan Penry]

What type of dishes do you cook?

Just ordinary stuff. But people's eyes do swivel sometimes...

[iris]

No I didn't but the position your presenting is the woman should be excused. Yes many will say they shouldn't hit but then they also don't start out justifying why they shouldn't be touched as the lead in. It's one or the other, they don't hit and no one should or if they do hit then they should be expecting an equal return. Stating they shouldn't be because they are weaker and men stronger is the very thing I stated, that social and cultural conditioning. Not much different in the aspect of a son is a son till he takes a wife but a daughter is a daughter all of her life. It's how our culture and society is conditioned to forgive and not raise them to expect an equal return for their actions.

Again, I think this whole equal return thing is off. If you are the stronger part, male or female, you often have the option of retaining them. If you're the weaker part, equal return doesn't seem very possible, getting away seems like the best option. defence doesn't HAVE to involve hitting, in fact I was always taught that the best defence was to get away. Of course that's not always possible. But if it is, and you still choose the equal return it's not really self defence anymore, it's revenge.
The consequenses should be of a legal sort.

[DanieMarie]

Again, I think this whole equal return thing is off. If you are the stronger part, male or female, you often have the option of retaining them. If you're the weaker part, equal return doesn't seem very possible, getting away seems like the best option. defence doesn't HAVE to involve hitting, in fact I was always taught that the best defence was to get away. Of course that's not always possible. But if it is, and you still choose the equal return it's not really self defence anymore, it's revenge.
The consequenses should be of a legal sort.

Agreed.

There is a huge difference between hitting someone back who is the same size as you and hitting someone back who is smaller than you. And that being said, I'd never choose hitting as my first form of defence. I'm pretty small, so I'd be most likely to try to just get away, but if it was someone my size, I'd always opt for restraint. Most of the time, there's a better option. Hitting is usually the childish way out.

[anunitu]

What I wrote is about not so much the question,but the answers that seem to invite argument rather than discussion. Just seems like every one goes that route sooner or later.

[B. de Corbin]

Just to toss a fun wrench into the machine -

Everybody talks about the difference in body strength as a deciding factor.

Just so you know, a small, light fighter who knows what he/she is doing, and who has practiced, can easily womp the stuffin' out of a much larger, stronger fighter who has little or no skill.

Ladies, learn to fight, then don't worry about it. Most men fight like idiots, especially when they are big enough to be intimidating. They've never had to learn how to move their head when a foot comes at it, so they take it on the chin...

[DanieMarie]

I used to take boxing lessons. I can throw a decent punch. But if a big guy is attacking me, I'm still going to run if I get the chance. I can still run better than I can fight.

[B. de Corbin]

I used to take boxing lessons. I can throw a decent punch. But if a big guy is attacking me, I'm still going to run if I get the chance. I can still run better than I can fight.


I agree with your strategy. "If I get the chance" may well be a deciding factor. I'm not advocating violence - what I advocate is the ability to make a decision, based on something other that the inability to make any other decision :)

[DanieMarie]

I agree with your strategy. "If I get the chance" may well be a deciding factor. I'm not advocating violence - what I advocate is the ability to make a decision, based on something other that the inability to make any other decision :)

Of course. If it comes between surviving and not surviving, I'll fight. And I definitely think that everyone should learn how to physically defend themselves, just in case. It's just that I think that resorting to fists should be a *last* resort.

[monsno_leedra]

Again, I think this whole equal return thing is off. If you are the stronger part, male or female, you often have the option of retaining them. If you're the weaker part, equal return doesn't seem very possible, getting away seems like the best option. defence doesn't HAVE to involve hitting, in fact I was always taught that the best defence was to get away. Of course that's not always possible. But if it is, and you still choose the equal return it's not really self defence anymore, it's revenge.
The consequenses should be of a legal sort.

Your stuck on making the idea of an equal return about physical strength when it's not. An equal return is the knowledge that legally, morally, ethically, etc they will face the same repercussions a man would face. It might come down to physical and they should be prepared for that but it doesn't mean that is the only venue. Like the comparison to auto insurance and the immediate presumption cost will be lower because women are not as aggressive or wild as drivers as men of the same age, especially when younger. Yet society in general still has the attitude that you have to go easier on women which by default means a lessor return.

Look at nearly any altercation a cop might respond to on domestic violence and see who is forced to vacate the residence. Reality wise it's almost always the man and the presumption is the man is the aggressive one. Why? Mostly due to the cultural and social notion of women being the weaker sex and an idea of protecting them I think. I think that attitude is the reason why any discussion about physical violence and action / reaction between a male and female always takes the perspective of the abused woman and argues from that point.

Defense wise I know my sisters and such were always taught the best defense is a good offense and awareness. Though psychology wise I admit it also falls into the idea that once you start running you'll never stop. Which is one of the justifications I suppose for why bullies pick on certain people and follow them, the idea they can run away from things and escape them vice standing their ground. The bully knows there is no fight just run or stand and cower which simply motivates them more to abuse their target. Doesn't matter if the bully is the school yard bully or the partner in a relationship, much of their power and presence comes from knowing the other will cower or attempt to flee.

[Medusa]

Let me throw in some help with the idea of equal. We here believe everyone is equal no matter male or female. Cool.

Some chic in a wheelchair is totally equal in worth to some football player dude. Should the dude hit her?

Does a young woman of 25 hit an elderly man of 86? They are equal. Why not?

[Hawkfeathers]

My answer to the OP is simply "No", with very rare and unusual exceptions.

[Medusa]

My answer to the OP is simply "No", with very rare and unusual exceptions.

As a female, I sorta wannna punch a few of you.

Just saying.:p

[monsno_leedra]

I do think age is an influence here. It's like growing up in the late 50's early to mid 60's we where constantly told you do not hit girls / women. Not only not to hit them but more than likely could count on your arse being handed to you by other guys who saw you do it. Yet there was also the disclaimer there as well. If she acted like a lady then you treated her like a lady until she showed or indicated otherwise. Yet if she acted like a lumberjack and came at you swinging then you treated her like a lumberjack and chopped away. Sort of the if she wants to play like a boy then treat her like a boy. Though in truth I can't rule out regionalism as well as I descend from a southern mountain lineage and wrong talk about a girl / woman could also get you shot.

[Tylluan Penry]

As a female, I sorta wannna punch a few of you.

Just saying.:p

Don't bother with the hitting. Just let me invite a few to dinner... ;)

[Briton]

I raised to hit back either way.

I wasn't raised in any particular way regarding violence. Like, they didn't say anything to me about it. I got into fights in school out of self defence, but my parents knew I never started fights. I came from a mildly conservative middle class Christian family. Fighting was more about talk and wit, really.


Gender doesn't matter or whatever you chose to identify didn't matter when it came to my Kin.

Gender doesn't matter to me either. I used to be quite willing to hit a guy. I wouldn't now, I avoid violence at all costs. I would avoid hitting a woman as much as a man out of principle of non-violence.


Then again my family is pretty violent as it is. It was usually "If someone hits you and you don't hit them back I'm beating your ass" or "I'm whooping you" I first heard it the time my six year old cousin threw a high heeled shoe at me and it hit me in my face right above my eye.

Well, violence breeds violence, simply.


edit:what does strength have to do with it? I don't understand why you dish something out if you can't take it back. I'm not saying the guy has to hit her full force and knock her out, but still.

Because people don't always think through their actions. I see absolutely no benefit in degenerating a situation by taking their actions at face value. It is far more beneficial for me to be a drop of sobriety in such a situation. Beneficial in the eyes of the law and avoiding the hospital.

[Taulmaril]

Bolded mine. That's that cultural and social conditioning kicking in. In many ways it's suggestive, well to me anyway, of it's condoned for the woman to do it as she is not expected to suffer the returns of her actions. Figure for most males is conditioned in us that if we project outward then we can expect a return force against us. Yet the idea that woman should be allowed to do so without an equal return is in part based on that they are petite and almost childish in their actions so there for not specifically responsible nor suffer the same returns.

If we take the cultural gender norm/bias/expectations that are placed on the sexes such as a woman should act like a lady then a woman who hits a man is stepping out of their so called gender roles making them unlady like and placing her in the gender role of a man. With that said, it then places her on equal footing with the man therefore it would seem that it is right to hit her back. Just saying.

[thalassa]

If we take the cultural gender norm/bias/expectations that are placed on the sexes such as a woman should act like a lady then a woman who hits a man is stepping out of their so called gender roles making them unlady like and placing her in the gender role of a man. With that said, it then places her on equal footing with the man therefore it would seem that it is right to hit her back. Just saying.

Well, if we are using that thought process, it would actually depend actually on why the woman felt compelled to hit the man.

If it was because he was attempting to take liberties with her person or character, she'd be expected to defend her virtue.

[monsno_leedra]

Well, if we are using that thought process, it would actually depend actually on why the woman felt compelled to hit the man.

If it was because he was attempting to take liberties with her person or character, she'd be expected to defend her virtue.

Sad part though is I think that is already a big assumption, especially when it comes to rape. If they didn't fight then they didn't try to stop their attacker. The fact that for some fighting might cause them even more harm or more violence doesn't seem to matter.

[anunitu]

Strangely,from reading about weird fetishes,there are Men that would actually like to be beaten on. In fact some of them would pay you to do said beating...weird world,something for everyone I guess..

[EndlessCravings]

Strangely,from reading about weird fetishes,there are Men that would actually like to be beaten on. In fact some of them would pay you to do said beating...weird world,something for everyone I guess..
Yep. I've heard of that. Probably because they're just masochists and it's easier to pay someone and have them shut up about it than to go to an Open Club or post on a fetush site.

[anunitu]

Here,only if not at work (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/23/sexual-fetish_n_4144418.html)

List of different fetishes(Man who know about some of these)

[EndlessCravings]

Here,only if not at work (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/23/sexual-fetish_n_4144418.html)

List of different fetishes(Man who know about some of these)
I only know of 17 out of that list. Pretty interesting.

[ThePaganMafia]

Stygiophilia
Arousal to the thought of hellfire and damnation

Thought that was called Baptist.

[Tylluan Penry]

The real problem here is in the original question: should men be able to hit women? Well then the answer must be 'no.' For much the same reason as adults are not supposed to hit children (their own or other people's.) There is inequality of strength in most cases, meaning it is not a fair fight.
More interesting to me is why 'men' would want to hit 'women.' Self defence, okay, I get that. But generally speaking, why do some men hate women so much?
Because some men do (and, before anyone jumps in - yes, some women hate men.)

[Medusa]

But generally speaking, why do some men hate women so much?
Our vaginas are like Studio 54. Only the cool and beautiful get in I guess.

[anunitu]

You done made me proud of your mastery of the english language,and Satire and elegant visions and comedic timing. BRAVO Duce!!!

[THANK...]

Violence sucks. Words, fists, or weapons, and this is coming from a martial arts and pugilist enthusiast that used to be a lead singer in street punk band - violence breeds more violence, and because of the first hand experience with violence it is not just a catchphrase, but a brutal truth of human aggression.

Unless it is for self defense and you have run out of options, no. Never.

[MaskedOne]

The real problem here is in the original question: should men be able to hit women? Well then the answer must be 'no.' For much the same reason as adults are not supposed to hit children (their own or other people's.) There is inequality of strength in most cases, meaning it is not a fair fight.


This is a flawed comparison. Yes strength matters and yes men normally have an advantage there but a healthy adult woman with even a vague idea of how to hurt someone can still land attacks that hurt a lot easier than any kid except a late teen. A woman with actual training can be pretty damn lethal.

I think to simplify my position immensely. If you are a threat (and some women have the skill and ability to be one) then I'll treat you as one. If you aren't a threat (some women, and men for that matter, aren't), then I won't. I make that decision case by case and I'm too lazy to start spelling out any factors in detail.

[B. de Corbin]

...But generally speaking, why do some men hate women so much?
Because some men do (and, before anyone jumps in - yes, some women hate men.)

The simple answer in "Because they are afraid." But that just leads you to the real question: "Why are they afraid?"

To answer that, you need a poet:


http://youtu.be/bhh4DcUbQJQ

[anunitu]

Wow,interesting Cohan with a video from "Man from Uncle" I recognize Illya Kuryakin done by David McCallum who is now doing Dr. Donald "Ducky" Mallard on N.C.I.S.

I am a BIG fan of him,BTW.(Cohan and McCallum)

[Tylluan Penry]

This is a flawed comparison. Yes strength matters and yes men normally have an advantage there but a healthy adult woman with even a vague idea of how to hurt someone can still land attacks that hurt a lot easier than any kid except a late teen. A woman with actual training can be pretty damn lethal.

I think to simplify my position immensely. If you are a threat (and some women have the skill and ability to be one) then I'll treat you as one. If you aren't a threat (some women, and men for that matter, aren't), then I won't. I make that decision case by case and I'm too lazy to start spelling out any factors in detail.
It's not a totally flawed comparison... because the original question just said men and women. Not weedy little men versus hulking great women. It relied upon stereotypes, which is why I compared with adults and children. Generally speaking women are not as strong as men. We often don't grow as tall, we don't try to build muscles, and we don't go to the boxing gym. For that reason alone, i answered as I did, and I did say the inequality of strength was in most cases.

Apart from that, you can all go and fight it out amongst yourelves ;)

[Taulmaril]

Well, if we are using that thought process, it would actually depend actually on why the woman felt compelled to hit the man.

If it was because he was attempting to take liberties with her person or character, she'd be expected to defend her virtue.

I absolutely agree.

- - - Updated - - -

Teleiophilia
Arousal to reproductive-aged adults

Wait, what? If one loves sex with an adult this is a sexual fetish? Shit I thought that was what was called "normal."

[MaskedOne]

It's not a totally flawed comparison... because the original question just said men and women. Not weedy little men versus hulking great women. It relied upon stereotypes, which is why I compared with adults and children. Generally speaking women are not as strong as men. We often don't grow as tall, we don't try to build muscles, and we don't go to the boxing gym. For that reason alone, i answered as I did, and I did say the inequality of strength was in most cases.

Apart from that, you can all go and fight it out amongst yourelves ;)

It occurs to me that the argument I was gonna go with bases off my sister and she is several inches above the average height (which leaves her reach about on par with mine). I'd still find most adult women far more threatening than most children but there is a significant difference in facing someone several inches shorter than you are and someone about an inch shorter.

[anunitu]

Having seen a few MMA things,the no holds bared things..I would not count some women as helpless for sure.

Just from watching a few of them...

[Tylluan Penry]

It occurs to me that the argument I was gonna go with bases off my sister and she is several inches above the average height (which leaves her reach about on par with mine). I'd still find most adult women far more threatening than most children but there is a significant difference in facing someone several inches shorter than you are and someone about an inch shorter.
:) It's often a personal thing actually... I'm just over a foot (12 inches; 30cm) shorter than Mr Penry. ;)
Mind you, he says he's terrified of me... ;)

[anunitu]

He might not want to eat poisoned munchies is all:rolleyes:

[Hawkfeathers]

I always loved the scene in "Something to Talk About" where an older relative gives Julia Roberts' character a recipe to poison her cheating husband with!

[Tylluan Penry]

He might not want to eat poisoned munchies is all:rolleyes:

Well, there is that too, I suppose!

- - - Updated - - -


I always loved the scene in "Something to Talk About" where an older relative gives Julia Roberts' character a recipe to poison her cheating husband with!

Oh, it's easier than you think!

[DragonsFriend]

But can you do it AND get away with it?

[Tylluan Penry]

But can you do it AND get away with it?

it's surprisingly easy apparently...

[Juniper]

Diabetes. ;)

[iris]

it's surprisingly easy apparently...

Yea, it seems so. I used to study bioanalysis, once in a while a teacher would go 'ok guys, this is untraceable after an hour (or something like that), so if you ever feel like killing someone'. We used to dream up creative ways of murdering each other without getting caught. We were weird, but yea, it's supposedly not too hard.